The glow of the "Green Lantern" was dimmer than Warner Bros. was hoping it would be at the box office this weekend. The film, one of the most expensive movies to be released this year, collected a studio-estimated $52.7 million, a figure below even Warner Bros.' modest expectations.

Click to expand...

Even the expectation of 55 million was out of reach.

Click to expand...

The 'light' of GL's diminishing potential has been unspooling over the last 50+ hrs.
After the Thur midnights did $100K better than Thor the hope was that GL might just pan out decent. Then the Fri estimates hit and it was less than XM:FC, but no panic just yet. Saturday tracking of Twitter showed a fairly high number of negative comments, then early this morning, early, the Sat estimates hit and showed the large drop. Now midday full estimates have been revised from $60m --> $55m ---> $52.7m

I will not be shocked if once Monday afternoon hits the weekend actuals indicate something like $51.8m

I knew it was mediocre and the comic fan in me is disappointed by this but not surprised. The movie just never recovered from the poor late November rushed trailer. ComicCon's reaction had nothing to this, the masses saw that November trailer and the marketing team was behind the 8-ball.

This weekend, Green Lantern's light was more red than green, but the comic book adaptation still drew an estimated $52.7 million on approximately 7,200 screens at 3,816 locations.

Green Lantern's start landed behind X-Men: First Class's $55.1 million and Thor's $65.7 million. It was also less than The Incredible Hulk and the two Fantastic Four movies, and the attendance disparity was even greater. Green Lantern's estimated attendance was even lower than Daredevil and Ghost Rider.

3D presentations at 2,711 locations accounted for 45 percent of Green Lantern's gross. The 3D share was close to Kung Fu Panda 2 and Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides but down from Thor's 60 percent. Distributor Warner Bros.' exit polling indicated that 64 percent of Green Lantern's audience was male and 63 percent was over 25 years old (19 percent was under 18).

Click to expand...

But, the attendance being lower than those other movies... that's not good. Especially with the amount of advertising. I'm getting a little sick of all the GL stuff I'm seeing.

Click to expand...

Lower attendance not only than THOR & X-Men:FC, which this summer sold nearly identical tickets but less than Daredevil and Ghost Rider. Which aside from being 5 yrs ago were late winter movies, not summer.

There is no good spin to this except that for the next 5 days the marketing team better push "Weekends #1 movie" hard.

I winder how many folks might be like me. I'm not interested in paying extra to see this in 3D. I'd rather see it in 2D. And since there is no 2d showing in my area I'll have to wait for dvd release.

Click to expand...

That seems to be cutting into box office as it appears that the novelty of 3D has worn off and people are being a lot more selective about what they will pay the extra brass for (I was reading an article about it earlier, I'll see if I can dig it out...)

As far as I could determine, Green Lantern was upconverted. It showed - the only thing that stuck out as truly 3D were

Parallax in the warehouse

and

Hal and Tomar's flight on Oa

. I also saw Thor in 3D - I thought it's 3D was weak, but Green Lantern's was far weaker. Hollywood needs to make a decision with each film: film it in 3D or don't do 3D at all. No more half-assing (read: converting) it.

I think Blake Lively was miscast - I don't know, something about the way she played it, I didn't buy, at least in the first half of the film. I hope there's a sequel film - but they may need to pull a The Dark Knight and recast the role of Carol. The film also should have made some references to the DC universe (something like, "It was also easier for Ferris to win the contract now that Wayne Enterprises is out of the defense business," or "Maybe we should we working with Luthorcorp" - similar to the Metropolis reference in Batman Forever) - even if they won't be in the same "universe." I also would have loved to see references to the other human Lanterns (Stewart, Gardner, Rayner and Scott).

Regaring the secret identity issue:

That being said, I loved the way they pulled a Smallville with the "secret identity" situation. Lois is a smart woman; the glasses thing just don't make sense that she wouldn't see through it. The same with the very smart Carol regarding Hal's Mardi Gras mask.

I wish we had more time spent with some of the other GLs, other than Kilowag and Tomar-Re. Maybe in the sequels. I've also imagined Hal as slightly older and more mature, at least from all the other incarnations that I've seen. But that would come with time (and, again, sequels). And, I would have focused on Hammond with this story and let the Parallax thing be an impending threat that would arrive a film or two down the road.

Peter Sarsgaard was great in this movie.

Overall, despite my problems with the film, I enjoyed it. I will probably see it again at some point. It had more highs than lows. Maybe next time, less cooks (or writers) in the kitchen.

I winder how many folks might be like me. I'm not interested in paying extra to see this in 3D. I'd rather see it in 2D. And since there is no 2d showing in my area I'll have to wait for dvd release.

Click to expand...

That seems to be cutting into box office as it appears that the novelty of 3D has worn off and people are being a lot more selective about what they will pay the extra brass for (I was reading an article about it earlier, I'll see if I can dig it out...)

Click to expand...

Agreed.
The tracking of 3-D films with % of gross coming from 3-D has been on a downward decline for the last 9+months since Alice in Wonderland in 2010.

The peak being Avatar where some 80% of its gross came from 3-D showings. A few months later Alice was in the mid 70%...then the glut of 3-D over the past 2010 year. It's continued to slide. Green Hornet was something in the upper 50%, Thor about in the mid-50%.

Green Lantern's estimated $52.7m take had only 45% of it's gross from 3-D showings(3rd paragraph). People either opting out for 2-D or staying home if it's not an available option. So much so that analysis indicates Disney likely lost money by having too many 3-D showings cause 2-D showings of POTC:4 sold out when 3-D options in the same theater weren't at capacity.

I hate upconverted. Alice in Wonderland's 3D was shit, big waste of money. Didn't help the movie sucked too.

Click to expand...

I have to imagine it was the crappy upconverted 3D (which was probably very dark and muddled) that made the critics hate it as much as they did. Because at the very worst, the 2D version I saw should have gotten like a 40-50% score.

No, not impressed with this at all. It's basically generic superhero origin stuff. We start with a guy living his normal life. He's a bit of an asshole but really a good intentioned guy with his heart in the right place despite his attitude and frequently screwing up. Then one day while minding his own business, he becomes a superhero and ends up saving the world as his trial by fire. Total and complete yawn.

3-D sucks, and I hate that my theatre is basically insisting we see movies that way by making it impossible to see 2-D showings. 3-D is hardly utilized, so I'm basically wearing glasses that makes my eyes hurt, give the picture a darker tint and oh yeah, makes the movie cost $17.00 to see. Really, Avatar was the only movie which was properly suited to 3-D and actually justified the higher price, even if it did suck.

I hate upconverted. Alice in Wonderland's 3D was shit, big waste of money. Didn't help the movie sucked too.

Click to expand...

I have to imagine it was the crappy upconverted 3D (which was probably very dark and muddled) that made the critics hate it as much as they did. Because at the very worst, the 2D version I saw should have gotten like a 40-50% score.

25% just doesn't make any sense to me.

Click to expand...

Maybe the critics were also responding to the craptastic story. It doesn't matter if it's in 3 or 2D... Alice blows. And not in the good way.

Green Lantern's start landed behind X-Men: First Class's $55.1 million and Thor's $65.7 million, and its Friday-to-Saturday drop of 22 percent was steeper than those movies' eight percent. The gross was also less than The Incredible Hulk and the two Fantastic Four movies, and the attendance disparity was only greater. Green Lantern's estimated attendance was even lower than Daredevil and Ghost Rider.

3-D sucks, and I hate that my theatre is basically insisting we see movies that way by making it impossible to see 2-D showings. 3-D is hardly utilized, so I'm basically wearing glasses that makes my eyes hurt, give the picture a darker tint and oh yeah, makes the movie cost $17.00 to see. Really, Avatar was the only movie which was properly suited to 3-D and actually justified the higher price, even if it did suck.

Click to expand...

I pretty much agree there. Thankfully, most of the big theaters here in Tempe, AZ give the option of 3-D or 2-D. All things being equal, I pick 2-D every time (with the exceptions of Avatar & Tron Legacy, both of which had the otherworldly feel greatly enhanced by the 3-D). But most of the time when I see 3-D, it's only because the 3-D showing was at a more convenient time.

The ending scene (for me) just came out of nowhere. After hearing Hals speech to the Guardians and praising him for a job well done/reminding Sinestro of the Latern Ring's ability to choose corectly - he just goes off and puts on the Yellow/fear ring? I the original GL continuity, I believe Sinestro was expelled and crafted the yellow ring himself for use in revenge. I would have lliked to SEE something like that rather then a quick end clip of him doning the ring and having the uniiform turn yellow.

Click to expand...

Yeah. That seemed like such a forced set up and Sinestro seemed like a much smarter guy than someone who would fall for something that totally had "BAD IDEA" written on it in big bold letters.

Overall, I thought the movie was decent but nothing special. This was my first real exposure to the Green Lantern (other than Justice League: The New Frontier). I think his powers are pretty cool but the movie itself is pretty anemic. I found myself really wishing that I was watching Reynolds play the Green Lantern in a Justice League movie. I can put up with fun-but-unremarkable Marvel movies like Iron Man 2 & Thor because I know they have a plan, building up to the massive Avengers movie next summer. Since DC doesn't currently have such a plan, I'm much less patient.

Reynolds was his decent, motor-mouthed self but Hal Jordan can't hold a candle to Tony Stark in the lovable asshole department. Still, Reynolds has the chance to redeem himself if he still gets to make that Deadpool movie they were talking about a couple years ago.

Blake Lively was surprisingly charismatic considering her CW pedigree. Too bad most of the other supporting characters (particularly the Earthly ones) don't make much of an impression.

I just read the Secret Origin comic today. There was a lot more of that in the movie than I remembered. I forgot Hector Hammond was it (but briefly, not as the main villain). I still wish they did that story instead, only if Atrocious had his Red Lantern powers. The best thing about it is the bonding of Hal and Sinestro.

I haven't seen this one, and don't intend to in the theater, rental tops, but I do want to share what put me off of seeing this one, as I like the comic book.

Too much effing CGI. After the trailer, I get this Ang Lee Hulk vibe most definitely. Yes, you are going to need graphics to adapt this material, but did everything remotely possible have to be cg? I learned my lesson with the whole gungan versus droids battle in The Phantom Menace.

I'll wait for dvd. If something stinks in 3D, seeing it on video won't much matter.